Sen. Ted Cruz on the Senate Floor Right Now Speaking Against Obamacare Until He Is 'Unable to Stand'

Technically it’s not a filibuster, but Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is certainly intending to do his best to simulate one. Right now he’s on the Senate floor speaking out in his fight to defund Obamacare and doesn’t intend to stop any time soon. He likely has no chance of actually succeeding in his efforts, but like Rand Paul’s drone filibuster (which was an actual filibuster), it will get him some attention. The Hill notes:

While Cruz's gambit had the flavor of a talking filibuster, Senate Democrats said it didn't technically qualify because it won't stop a scheduled procedural vote Wednesday that will allow senators to take up the House bill. 

Cruz is attempting to delay — for as long as possible — consideration of a continuing resolution passed last week by the House, which funds the government through mid-December while also stripping funding for the Affordable Care Act. 

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is expected to advance H.J.Res. 59 with an amendment to remove the House language that defunds ObamaCare. 

A vote to end debate on the motion to proceed is expected Wednesday, and Cruz's actions cannot stop that from happening.

He’s been speaking for less than 30 minutes, and I’m about to jump in to livetweet some of his comments at our 24/7 Twitter feed. He’s also being televised on CSpan here.

UPDATE, 7:10 P.M. (Eastern): Cruz is still going on, but he's reached the point where his comments have essentially looped and he's repeating his arguments, and so we've brought about an end to our live-tweeting. He started speaking at 2:40 p.m., so it's been 4.5 hours so far. CSpan is still airing his comments for those who want to watch live.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Well, he should have plenty of material, but I don't think he's going to get even the scant love that journalists gave Paul for the drone filibuster.

  • Brett L||

    Relevant: Leftist commentator hates on Cruz because he is and outsider not an insider. And then cites people like Karl Rove and Jennifer Rubin to drive home the point.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    That hit piece is just fucking pathetic.

    The establishment complains because he's and elitist and works hard too!

  • sloopyinca||

    In unrelated news, your fantasy football team needs to be renamed the Cleveland Browns...

    ...for obvious reasons.

  • Brett L||

    I was thinking of renaming it the Washington Vikings.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Since you're in Florida, I'm horrified you didn't go with the Jacksonville Buccaneers.

  • John||

    The hive mind in Washington is very interesting. The logic can go either way. Is Cruz willing to shut down the government for the single purpose of defunding Obamacare or are the Democrats willing to shut down the government for the single purpose of funding it? Both statements are equally valid. Yet, only the first is ever uttered.

    You could just as easily conclude that Obamacare is an impending train wreck that needs to be fixed and that it makes sense to delay it for a year or two to give Congress time to try and fix it and that Obama is willing to shut down the government because he is too vain to admit he is ever wrong. Yet, that conclusion is never made by anyone in Washington. There is something about the group think there that requires everyone to assume as a first principle that no one can ever be expected to admit a mistake an no government program, no matter how harmful, ever dies. If you operate from those two assumptions, you quickly conclude the Republicans are trying to shut the government down in some quixotic quest to repeal the laws of nature.

  • Tony||

    No John, bullshit straight from the Republican talking points factory doesn't need to be treated as equally valid by the press. It's not the 90s anymore.

  • tarran||

    I think Tony needs a juicebox and a tissue to dry his tears.

  • Loki||

    Why bother? He won't drink the juicebox because he prefers drinking water since Michelle told him he needs to stay hydrated to lose weight, and he'll just end up masterbating into the tissue using his tears as lube while praying to his Shephard Fairey Obama "Hope" poster that the Lightbringer will smite us non-believing libertarian heathens for our blasphemies against the Godking.

  • John||

    I know Tony, you are a prog, so it is not like formal logic is something you would be familiar with. So given your inherent intellectual limitations, it is not surprising that the point about both statements being equally valid would go right over your head.

    If you would get a little smarter, the world wouldn't be so confusing and make you so angry. Just a suggestion.

  • Tony||

    No Democrat is threatening to shut down the government or fail to raise the debt ceiling over a policy dispute. Republicans are just trying rather pathetically to do the only thing they've ever been good at in the last 30 years--change the language in an attempt to change people's attitudes. But as even most Republicans know that the public will blame them in the event of a shutdown or debt ceiling calamity, they're not trying that hard. Of course you still buy into whatever bullshit they send on down, because you're you.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Fuck off sockpuppet.

  • John||

    Yes they are, you half wit. They fund the government tomorrow. The bill is out of the house. They won't do it because the bill includes defunding Obamacare.

    You really amaze me Tony. You actually lack basic reasoning skills. Once in a while you really astound me. I could type on here all day and you would never understand the point I am making. You would just emote more talking points. Wow.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I imagine Tony's point has to do with the House including defunding provisions in a CR rather than as a separate matter.

    I frankly could care less about this slap fight between the big two parties.

  • Tony||

    Fine, whatever. Since apparently the only thing you care about is which political party gets the blame, let's stick to that. Everyone pretty much understands Republicans are going to get the blame. Whether it's reality or just perception--well, you're the one obsessing over perception.

    So if a media conspiracy is what gets Republicans blamed (even though most Republicans already appreciate that they will be blamed), then why don't you guys get a better media strategy? All you ever do is whine. Aren't you supposed to be Galtian supermen? Go expend a little effort for Christ's sake. It is baffling how much mileage the right has gotten over the decades with the single political strategy of whining like little tittybabies about everything.

  • some guy||

    I'd be happy if the GOP got blamed for the shutdown. Because it would only last a few days before a compromise would be reached. Then the Dems can take the blame for PPACA being such a giant clusterfuck. There's plenty of blame to go around and most of us here hate both sides.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    WTF is a tittybaby? I know you're gay and all but boobs don't work that way.

  • John||

    There is no blame to be given. If the government shuts down, no one but the people who work for it will care.

    If the Dems best argument for the mid terms is "the meany Republicans shut down the government for a week last year", the Dems are in even more trouble than I think they are.

    The bottom line is millions of people are about to see their health insurance rates go through the roof and millions of others are about to have to pay a fine for the crime of not having a job that providing insurance.

    Cruz is trying save you people. When Obamacare hits, it is going to be a national tragedy. A real tragedy where millions of innocent people suffer. But it will all be the Republicans fault, you evil little twit.

  • some guy||

    Plenty of people will care if the government shuts down. Most of them won't know why they care. But they will care because the radio/TV/internet tells them to.

  • Tony||

    Oh yes I'm so sure your and Cruz's only concern is the well-being of the American people.

    Of course you'd think you'd offer an alternative than the prior status quo, which is definitely not an improvement on the ACA. Why, it's almost like you're treating the ACA as a political punching bag and Ted Cruz is running for president.

    But I believe you. For the first time in your life you care about human well-being instead of the political fortune of Republicans. Oh John, you're such a softie.

  • some guy||

    I do have an alternative other than the prior status quo. Repeal all health care and health insurance related regulations. Phase out Medicaid and Medicare over 5 years.

    I've got another alternative for you: Single payer for everyone under the age of 25. After that, no regulation, everyone must take responsibility for themselves. Now the children are taken care of and adult liberties are maximized. It's win-win-win.

  • KDN||

    But it will all be the Republicans fault

    Now you're getting it! If only they had agreed to this bill and worked constructively with our President instead of ineffectively fighting it every step of the way then the idiotic policy would have no distortionary effects and instead of it being haphazardly and incompetently implemented it would be already up and running with no problems whatsoever.

    You see, that is the great balance of politics: Democrats come up with brilliant policy that the cold, managerial Republicans can adequately implement. That the stupid party refuses to plat their ordained role is proof of just how stupid they are.

  • Lord Peter Wimsey||

    Tittybabies? Sounds like some illegal magazine you subscribe to. Disgusting.

    Don't make me call the cops on you.

  • some guy||

    No Democrat is threatening to shut down the government or fail to raise the debt ceiling over a policy dispute.


    President Obama said he would not sign a funding resolution that does not include PPACA. President Obama is a Democrat. Therefore a Democrat is threatening to shut down the government over a policy dispute.

  • Loki||

    President Obama said he would not sign a funding resolution that does not include PPACA. President Obama is a Democrat. Therefore a Democrat is threatening to shut down the government over a policy dispute.

    There you go, bringing up "facts" and "logic" again...

  • Tony||

    That is Republicans' cue to stop with their stupid base-coddling quest to do something that will never happen, and which they are perfectly aware will never happen.

    I don't know why it should be necessary to explain to allegedly nonpartisan people, but an equivalence between Republicans threatening to wreck the economy if they don't get the ACA repealed and Democrats refusing to repeal the ACA in response to this threat is a false one.

  • John||

    Tony, it couldn't be that the Democrats are willing to further wreck and already wrecked economy to save funding for a bill the majority of the country doesn't want and even they admit doesn't work. I couldn't be that.

  • Tony||

    Good lord John you could be a stand-in for some GOP mouthpiece on MSNBC, and you'd probably charge a lot less. You should give them your card. I've heard every single word you're typing, in pretty much the exact order you're typing them, come from those shills. I'm not an idiot John, I pay attention to what the enemy does. You can't win me over with Republican talking points.

  • John||

    Yes Tony, the talking points you have don't respond to my post and you are too stupid to come up with your own response. So instead, you just throw some buzz words out.

    I'm not an idiot John

    Your posts and thinking say otherwise.

  • Hopfiend||

    Sheesh, you actually believe there is a major difference, and that Democrats are in politics to help people. You are more of a lost cause than I suspected. They have just been pounding you over and over again. This is somewhat akin to battered child syndrome. I hope you get well eventually.

  • Tony||

    Democrats risked and in many cases lost their seats trying to deliver universal healthcare. Republicans have no policy idea whatsoever and don't indicate they care about the well-being of Americans at all.

  • Hopfiend||

    I know you believe they care, and Republicans don't. It is the pathology of a political "teamer." You, and they, were simply wrong about the politics of it. Feel free to continue believing in your myths all you want, doesn't make 'em so.

  • Lord Peter Wimsey||

    "Democrats risked and in many cases lost their seats..."

    Stop! You're making me hard.

  • KPres||

    Logic is a Republican talking point?

  • John||

    Yes. Tony can't understand it, so it must be.

  • Swiss Servator, Spare a Franc?||

    And there is good old Bo wading in to Tony's defense. Oy.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    The HoR passed a bill to fund government sans Obamacare. The dems say no way.

    It's pretty clear who is threatenting to shut down government if they don't get ther way here and it aint the republicans.

  • Hopfiend||

    Ridiculous, "reasoning" that allows you to dismiss an ideological opponent rather than having to engage and refute. Convenient and lazy. Not the sign of a first class mind.

  • waffles||

    Cruz's actions cannot stop that from happening

    Well then I guess he should just sit down then. He's wasting precious time for Senators to do other Senate stuff like keep our government running. And I don't need to tell you what will happen if our government shuts down, do I?

  • ||

    We'll all be better off?

  • Ska||

    That's a big Twinkie.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    And I don't need to tell you what will happen if our government shuts down, do I?

    People in Yemen and Pakistan will get married without fear of a Hellfire Missile crashing their wedding?

  • waffles||

    You really think failing to pass a budget will stop the droning?
    C'mon it's like the most essential function!

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Obama keeps telling me that America must pay its bills (to the Federal Reserve Bank and to itself).

    I thought spending borrowed money is the government's most essential function.

  • Killazontherun||

    She was going to die on the honeymoon, anyway. /Janet Reno

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    On a personal note, the 24/7 Twitter feed page makes me hungry for a Creamsicle.

  • Kaptious Kristen||

    So. many. pugs. (I have unpolitic.me running and set to show me pictures of pugs).

  • Brett L||

    I know this makes me an evil person, but I would rather look at politicians than pugs.

  • Swiss Servator, Spare a Franc?||

    Ahem....Henry Waxman. KK awaits your retraction.

  • Kaptious Kristen||

    I have already told Brett he is the worlds greatest monster for not finding pugs adorable.

  • John||

    They really are cute. As much as it pains me to admit that.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Their friggin' eyes pop out of their sockets! Only japanese people find that cute.

  • ||

    You gotta admit, the little cigar is just adorable.

  • Brett L||

    Its nice of you to go for bat for her, very chivalrous, but I'm going to stick to my wrong-headed, but honestly felt opinions.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    None of this gets me any closer to that Creamsicle.

  • Brett L||

    Have a juicebox instead.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Suderman calls for a competition, and suddenly Tony shows up on Shackford's thread. Hm. Interesting.

  • sloopyinca||

    What the fuck is a "Twitter feed"?

  • waffles||

    Mike Lee massively overstates my love of gubmint and my fear of seeing them have to shut down.

  • John||

    If this whole thing is such a mistake for the Republicans, why are the Democrats and their court media so angry about it?

  • waffles||

    Why do you want to play chicken with the full faith and credit of the United States?

  • John||

    Shutting down the government is not defaulting on the debt. And even if it were, missing a payment is not defaulting. If a month of not paying the debt and a complete shutdown resulted in an actual budget deal that did something about our long term spending problem (I know that would never happen but work with me here), the US credit rating would go up not down.

  • waffles||

    Up is down? The full faith and credit of the United States is what Obama said is at stake here. So is he being untruthful?

  • John||

    Maybe. Or it might be that he is just so stupid that he doesn't understand how the market for US debt works.

  • Bardas Phocas||

    If the Bernanke can drive like a drunken teenager "with the full faith and credit of the United States" I say we get chance.

  • Loki||

    it might be that he is just so stupid that he doesn't understand how the market for US debt works.

    B-b-but... He's so eloquent! And he went to all the right schools! You just think he's stupid because you're a racist teathuglican! /Prog-tard

  • Anonymous Coward||

    The full faith and credit of the United States

    What does states respecting each others' contracts, laws, and judgments, have to do with the national debt?

  • waffles||

    I don't know, I just heard it on the NPR over and over again this week. Maybe it's like a mantra for why Obamacare must go on.

    full faith and credit of the United States
    full faith and credit of the United States
    full faith and credit of the United States

  • Hillary's Clitdong||

    It's a reference to the strongest kind of of promise a government can make to pay a debt. Hitting the debt ceiling does not automatically damage the "full faith and credit of the United States". That would only be jeopardized if the US decided to default on its obligations as a cost-saving measure. It could do other things, like cutting other spending and continuing to pay the interest it has promised on its securities, or print money to pay its obligations.

  • John||

    ^^THIS^^ Hitting the debt ceiling or even suspending payment on the debt over an impasse in Congress is not defaulting.

  • MJGreen||

    It would be the first time that Obama is either untruthful or wrong about something, I know, but this just may be that rare occurrence.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    The full faith and credit of the United States is what Obama said is at stake here. So is he being untruthful?

    Better question:

    Has Obama ever been truthful? I can't think of a single instance.

  • Tony||

    I heard yesterday that at Harvard Ted Cruz refused to study with anyone who did not do an undergraduate at Harvard, Yale, or Princeton. He wouldn't pair up with anyone from the "lesser Ivies." Harvard must be reeling from the amount of damage this one man is doing to their brand. Haven't these guys learned by now that right-wing-grandstanding your way to the White House hasn't worked since Reagan?

  • Swiss Servator, Spare a Franc?||

    Oh, well you "heard"....that is good enough for me! BURN THE WITCH!

  • John||

    The voices in your head don't count. And for the idea that the same people who said Obama was qualified to be President because he went to Harvard to now say that shows a lack of self awareness to say the least.

    You are not even trying anymore. You are getting as bad as shreek.

  • Tony||

    Ted Cruz Only Wanted Study Buddies from Princeton, Harvard, and Yale.

    I would certainly never say merely going to Harvard is a qualification for anything. The crucial thing you idiots always skip over is the fact that Obama did actually get elected president (the only qualification that matters), twice, and he did it while being black. Ted Cruz is not going to be elected president, and not just because he's a snob and a grandstander.

  • John||

    Yeah Tony, something called "Washington Wispers" is such a reliable source. It must be true.

    And if getting elected President makes you qualified, I expect to hear you tell me how Bush was so qualified.

    Obama wasn't qualified to do really anything. The fact that he got stupid white people to vote for him because he was black, didn't make him qualified.

  • Tony||

    Stop being a racist troll, John. It's beneath even you.

    The only qualifications for president are that he be 35 or older and a natural-born citizen. Oh, he also has to get elected, which Bush didn't actually accomplish the first time around.

  • waffles||

    You really think an Al Gore presidency would have stopped the Affordable Care Act from happening?

    ...whatever

    full faith and credit of the United States
    full faith and credit of the United States
    full faith and credit of the United States

  • John||

    The truth hurts dumb ass. If Colin Powell or someone with anything approaching the qualifications to be President had been the first black President, it would have been different. But the fact that someone so devoid of experience or accomplishments was elected tells you that dumb guilty white people just voted for him because he was black. Had Obama been white, he would still be community organizing back in Chicago.

    Everyone knows this is the case. And the real tragedy of Obama is that thanks to idiots like you electing him, the country will probably never elect another black President this century. People like you are too immature and racist to be trusted with such an option. No one on either side wants to go through this again.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I am sure some white people voted for Obama out of guilt. Others to 'make history.' Others because they were moved by his oratory or the massive campaigns in his favor.

    I could care less what his 'experience or accomplishments' were before he ran for President. It is not uncommon to have less than impressive people become their parties standard bearer in our history. It is what they do when they come to power that concerns me, and by that standard Obama concerns me quite a bit.

  • John||

    I could care less what his 'experience or accomplishments' were before he ran for President.

    I am sorry but that makes you a moron. You can't elect someone with no executive experience, no international experience and very little political experience President. You can, but it is going to end in disaster. It actually is a hard job and a job where the person can do a lot of damage. Regardless of ideology, the person in the job needs some experience and savy since events often overtake whatever his ideology is.

    It is a national embarrassment that someone of Obama's complete lack of accomplishment could have been elected President.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    -You can't elect someone with no executive experience, no international experience and very little political experience President.

    But we have in our nation. Kennedy had little of these. Lincoln had very little of these.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    It is not uncommon to have less than impressive people become their parties standard bearer in our history.

    Oh bullshit.

    Name any other president that was elected with the equivalent of community organizer as his primary qualification.

  • Tony||

    I've told you before, if anything the data suggest that Obama suffered slightly more because of his race than benefited. Anyone voting for him because he is black would have voted for the Democrat regardless; but some people who might have voted for a Democrat chose not to because this one was black. So your assessment is just total bullshit, and your insistence on repeating it makes you a racist troll.

    He won because he beat the Clinton machine and then the Republicans. That doesn't happen by sheer accident. The fact that you can't accept Obama as qualified, even 5 years into his tenure, given the resounding disaster that was his predecessor, can only be described as more racist trolling.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    -given the resounding disaster that was his predecessor

    Tony, I agree his predecessor was this, but do you think Obama has done better? Even with what I take to be your positions can you really describe his administration as a success?

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Counselor, are you kidding me right now? You're engaging it...respectfully?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I always try to engage anyone respectfully. Perhaps it is masochism, but it is who I am.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Dude, this is the internet and the only thing Tony is good for is mocking and mirth at his expense. Get with the program.

    And would you respectfully ask your new sparring partner WTF a "tittybaby" is? I still don't know the answer.

  • Tony||

    Yes, by any and all objective measures Obama has been better.

    Point 1: Obama has not started a massively costly and destructive decade-long war based on lies.

    I don't feel the need to go on really.

    Why don't you explain what makes him such a disaster? I mean, most people calling him that are doing so because it benefits them politically for idiots to think of him as a disaster, but you're not a Republican shill. So I'll give you civil liberties abuses with the NSA, but with respect to things within the president's power to control, I don't think any reasonable person can conclude other than that he's done a fairly good job. He did have a hell of a mess to clean up.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    -Why don't you explain what makes him such a disaster?

    The economy is and has been pretty terrible by historic standards. The one bill he has seemed to pass is the ACA, which, apart from being a corporatist monstrosity, has been a disaster in implantation and effect (far worse I would say than the Bush administration's debacle with the prescription drug plan).

    And then, yes those civil liberties abuses.

  • tarran||

    Don't forget the unlawful bombing of Libya, arming Al Queda in Syria, continuing the Bush era network of torture and secret prisons, the bombing of civilian targets in the Yemeni civil war, his corrupt give aways to cronies via Energy Deparment renewable energy programs, the FOIA evasion uncovered at the EPA (that no doubt is going on in other cabinet departments).

    Furthermore, he supported the expansion of TARP. Intervened in the GM bankrupcy (violating the principle that bondholders are to be repaid before stockholders).

    On the IRS front, Obama routinely benefits from leaking confidential info about his opposition from what are supposed to be sealed government records. This trend started with his campaign for the senate (the sealed divorce papers of his opponent), and continued with IRS records of hostile political organizations, including donor lists, being handed out to his political allies. Furthermore, through multiple channels, the admin has been engagin in unprecedented data mining to identify not only supporters but opponents, including creepy calls for his supporters to provide his campaign with the email addresses of people opposing Obamacare.

    Not to mention the whole Fast and Furious debacle, which made no sense as a law enforcement operation (it was designed to not catch anyone), but did make sense as a political operation (ie to provide a bodycount in Mexico) to justify restrictions on private gun ownership in the US.

  • Killazontherun||

    the sealed divorce papers of his opponents. His people used that tactic on Booby Rush and likely a third opponent in Chicago, as well.

  • KDN||

    Dammit tarran, he said objective. Those problems are all subjective wingnut talking points, you indoctrinated fool.

    OPEN YOUR EYES MAN! YOU'RE JUST LETTING YOURSELF BE USED!

  • Loki||

    Remember though, tarran, in Tony's view all those things you posted above are positives.

  • KPres||

    " Obama has not started a massively costly and destructive decade-long war based on lies."

    No, he spent the same massive amount on a stimulus package that made the economy worse.

    At least Bush's stupidity displaced a dictator.

  • John||

    Tony,

    Obama was completely unqualified for the job. Had he not been black no one black or white would have even considered him.

    You elected the village idiot President. But the upshot is virtually no one in this country has any faith left in the government. And he still has three years left in office. Good luck with that in the future as you sell government as the solution to every problem.

  • Tony||

    Whine whine whine.

  • KPres||

    It's a democracy. Whining is how you get things done. It's just that people like you are naturals while the rest of us have to work at it.

  • KDN||

    Whine whine whine.

    Codename: Tony

    Real: Antonio Trolmando

    Vitals: 5'9", 170 lbs, 23 yrs old

    Origin: Tulsa, OK

    Superpowers: Inexhaustible supplies of rage, envy, paranoia and projection, immunity to logic, the ability to conjure unfalsifiable data from the deep recesses of his mind, a haughty sense of his own superiority about fields where he has no discernible knowledge or ability.

    Primary adversary: The reason.com commentariat that for some ghastly purpose keeps responding to him.

  • Loki||

    some people who might have voted for a Democrat chose not to because this one was black.

    And you know this for a fact because...

  • tarran||

    Yet again Tony is showing his true colors: the man is consumed by envy. His entire moral code is founded on envy, and he assumes that envy is the basis of other people's moral codes as well.

    Hence his judgement that Cruz is a snob who only wants to associates with Ivy Leaguers should be proof that he is a bad person. For a person consumed by jealousy, the notion that he could be excluded from some benefit is an unbearable outrage. To th enon-envious it's a meh. I mean, if Cruz chose instead to only study with hot girls from England, would we care?* No! So what if it's other ivy leaguers he studies with?

    *This is a trick scenario: there are no hot girls from England, only the girls you meet upon leaving Albion.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I think if it came out that Obama would only associate with other Ivy Leaguers there would be a fair amount of sport made here and elsewhere about that. It betrays a concerning elitism.

    Of course this charge against Cruz strikes me as hearsay which should be dismissed.

  • John||

    No. People would laugh at it. But it would not even hit the top 100 reasons why people don't like Obama.

  • Tony||

    I thought of it as adding a little color to Cruz's characterization, but if you want to psychoanalyze me over the Internet, again, that's your prerogative. I don't personally feel envious of fat, white Republicans because I think their lives are miserable, cynical seas of lies and ugliness. But I would rather suffer from envy than panting obsequiousness to the elite classes. I have way too much self-respect for that.

  • tarran||

    But I would rather suffer from envy than panting obsequiousness to the elite classes.

    Dude, you *are* obsequious to the elites. Your slobbering over them is really, really embarrassing.

    That feeling your feeling isn't self respect.

  • Hopfiend||

    oh dear gawd the delicious irony here.

  • ||

    Wait. Wait. Obama is black?

  • NoVAHockey||

    is he? the halo is so bright it's hard to tell

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    "one drop rule", but don't call Team Blue racist.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    "He said he didn't want anybody from 'minor Ivies' like Penn or Brown," law-school roommate Damon Watson told GQ Magazine.

    Well, if Ted Cruz's less-successful law school roommate said, that's all the proof I need.

    Except for the small fact that your pathetic attempt at poisoning the well doesn't matter at all when it comes to Cruz's opposition to Obamacare.

  • Tony||

    Take a cue from Bo above and think about how you'd treat this story if it were about Obama.

    "We're not Republicans, we're nonpartisan free thinkers here!!"

  • some guy||

    So Obama and Ted Cruz are both egotistical asses? So what? It has nothing to do with whether PPACA should be implemented.

  • Tony||

    It is already law, and will not be repealed under the current government.

    There, glad to clear that up.

  • some guy||

    It's a law that has no funding. There's plenty of stuff in the law that has no funding. Funding is a major part of running any enterprise. That's why fights over funding are so important. It doens't matter what you say your are going to do. What matters is whether you can do it.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    -It is already law, and will not be repealed under the current government.

    We do not have to leave every pass law untouched. It is perfectly appropriate to repeal a law or, given our political structure, to defund it.

  • Banjos||

    think about how you'd treat this story if it were about Obama.

    Ok give me half a second, yup, still wouldn't give a fuck. This kind of "newsreporting" falls under celebrity gossip.

  • Banjos||

    Ha, apparently GQ's source, Damon Watson, was disbarred over a DUI. Still don't give a shit about the story, but it's funny to see idiots fling poo.

    "Cruz's former babysitter says that Cruz used to eat his boogers."

    "Oh yeah, well that babysitter was suspended from school for being drunk."

  • KPres||

    That's because Obama's an outright ideological statist and Cruz isn't. I'm pretty sure if Lindsey Graham had said it he'd get blasted all over the comments, too.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Take a cue from Bo above and think about how you'd treat this story if it were about Obama.


    *Thinks*
    Nope, still gossip.

    But then, I don't need to rely on gossip as evidence of Obama's elitist tendencies. We have enough of his actions as President to demonstrate his elitism. If Ted Cruz is an "elitist" for not studying with students from "lesser Ivies" (note: I am of the opinion that the federal government would be vastly improved if every Ivy Leaguer were purged from government tomorrow) then what is Obama, if not an elitist, when he fills his Cabinet and the executive branch with political dynasts, lobbyists and Washington insiders?

  • Loki||

    ...Damon Watson told GQ Magazine.

    You mean this was in GQ magazine!? Oh well, then, coming from such a respectable hard news source as GQ it must be true!

  • VG Zaytsev||

    I heard yesterday that at Harvard Ted Cruz refused to study with anyone who did not do an undergraduate at Harvard, Yale, or Princeton.

    Translation - he didn't like to hang out with brain dead progressive drones.

  • Loki||

    Uh, dude, you do realize that a lot of brain dead progressive drones also went to Harvard, Yale, or Princeton, right?

  • tarran||

    Harvard must be reeling from the amount of damage this one man is doing to their brand.

    It's like watching a two year old angrily lashing out shrieking the first thing that comes to his mind.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I have little use for such hearsay, and I would like to see Obamacare destroyed.

    Having said that I am wary of Cruz. I cannot take his current anti-establishment stance seriously as his background strikes me as fairly establishment. I cannot shake the suspicion that he aims to undercut Paul (who has a much more impressive 'anti-establishment' background) in his often successful campaign to promote a more libertarian GOP.

  • John||

    What about his background makes you think he is establishment? And Jesus fucking Christ, the idea that Cruz is some kind of establishment Manchurian candidate is just fucking bizarre. Really? if you don't like Cruz, fine. But come up with a reason and stop wasting space with this bullshit.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Cruz went to an Ivy school. He clerked for prominent federal judges, then worked for one of the more inside the beltway law firms. He was part of the Bush machine in Texas.

    Conversely, Paul went to Baylor. He worked in outside groups until he ran for Senate.

  • John||

    Cruz went to an Ivy school. He clerked for prominent federal judges, then worked for one of the more inside the beltway law firms. He was part of the Bush machine in Texas.

    So fucking what? Where he went college means nothing one way or another. And Bush was governor, every Republican was to some degree a part of the Bush machine.

    Again, if you don't like Cruz, give a rational reason not bullshit, "he can't really mean that" crap.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Let me ask you, would you rather see Cruz's star rise, or Paul's?

  • Tony||

    John likes Sarah Palin. His opinion is there only to laugh at.

  • waffles||

    I don't know if I can trust a man who think Sarah Palin is an intelligent capable human being. But Sarah Palin and John are not about to implement the biggest clusterfuck of a law that I will have ever seen. So I have no idea why you vilify them while there are people actually in power who are actually fucking shit up for people like me.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    I don't think there's much in the way of evidence that Sarah Palin is dumber than any of the others. I mean, Joe fucking Biden is Vice-President, which means he's considered "qualified" for the Presidency.

  • Loki||

    I have no idea why you vilify them while there are people actually in power who are actually fucking shit up for people like me.

    Because Tony has a huge man crush on his choco-Nixon dreamboat, and he doesn't care that he's fucking shit up for "people like you" because "people like you" probably means productive white non-progtarded males. IOW, the very personification of everything he has been programmed to hate and fear.

  • John||

    Palin is terrible Tony. I mean it is not like she completely fucked up the health care system, got ass raped by Putin over Syria, ran up more debt than every other President combined, and presided over an economy where fewer people work than at any time since World War II or anything.

  • Tony||

    Yeah well Palin failed to get elected, so it's not really a fair comparison given that her only power is to vomit ridiculous horsehit on FOX News.

    Democrats have offered reasonable proposals for reducing unemployment, and Republicans have opposed every one, because they are sociopaths who don't care how many people suffer if it helps them get reelected.

  • Hopfiend||

    But Sarah does look like Tina Fey.

  • John||

    I don't really care. And I fail to see how precludes the other.

    Let me ask you a question, do you do anything but concern troll?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I am frankly concerned about someone like Cruz undercutting Paul, as I fear the latter can change the GOP while the former can or will not.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    It's just more of the establishment-media bullshit.

    Run someone from outside the elite bubble and OMG they're dumb; run someone that was in the elite bubble and left it and OMG they're elitist or OMG they're evil.

    Fuck the establishment and fuck the media.

  • eyeroller||

    Cruz is an opportunist who jumped on the tea party bandwagon, and he's using this opportunity to advance his name recognition.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    This is what I suspect.

  • Pro Libertate||

    To be sure, it's an improvement if politically minded folks even think they can be successful by catering to limited government-favoring voters.

    Besides, if he continues to push libertarianish policies, who cares if he doesn't really mean it in his heart?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    When Cruz starts to call for cutting defense, ending mandatory minimums and curtailing the drug war, let me know. I will then drop the 'concern.' At present he strikes me as Jim Demint more than Ron or Rand Paul.

  • Pro Libertate||

    No, he's not pure. But he's been on the right side of things more often than most.

  • KPres||

    He did call for repealing the NDAA, which is a libertarian stance against a conservative one. And he hasn't said anything about pot legalization, but given that he's from Texas, that probably means he's for it but is keeping hush to keep his seat.

  • KPres||

    Who gives a fuck what his motive is? He wants to defund Obamacare, so he's my guy as long as he's doing that.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    I heard yesterday

    Who'd you hear it from, Goodwife Tony w/o spaces?

    Or maybe you delude yourself into imagining that someone here is foolish enough to take you at your good word?

  • some guy||

    So Ted Cruz is an egotistical ass? So what? That has nothing to do with whether PPACA should be implemented.

  • Loki||

    I heard yesterday...

    And I heard yesterday that you fuck sheep.

    Harvard must be reeling from the amount of damage this one man is doing to their brand.

    Wait, I'm confused, I thought you were talking about Cruz, not Obama.

  • Swiss Servator, Spare a Franc?||

    Mr. Shackford ... Suderman posted before you, nyah nyah!

  • Scott S.||

    I have more comments. Ha ha!

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Yeah "lucky" for you Tony showed up..."lucky" indeed...

  • Swiss Servator, Spare a Franc?||

    Curse you!

    *runs back to other thread*

  • Scott S.||

    Bah, Peter got all the Facebook likes.

  • Ted S.||

    Who gives a shit about Facebook likes?

  • waffles||

    I don't understand why congressional staffers and the like should be exempt from this clusterfuck. How did that go down?

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    It's contained in Article II, Sec 37 of the Fuck You That's Why Clause.

  • waffles||

    Well I admit, that's pretty brazen. Still Senator Vitter talks like a fag so I think they should just vote for the full faith and credit of the United States.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    And his shit's all fucked up.

  • MJGreen||

    THEY ARE THE LAW

  • Tony||

    "Oh Ted Cruz, senator of the Republican party, you're so dreamy!"

    --Everyone here but like 3 people including me

    Can someone point me to the libertarian website?

  • ||

    No, cunt. Fuck off.

  • Tony||

    I mean we all are clear that that Ted Cruz is doing now is raising money and getting media airtime, right? It's not like he is doing anything in service of repealing the ACA.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Fuck off sockpuppet.

  • Tony||

    I will fuck off the day you independent-minded free-thinking unique individuals stop sucking Republican cock. It's all up to you.

  • The Last American Hero||

    Mr. O's supporters are always bragging about how he's the only adult in the room. Here's a chance for the "only adult" to come out and admit that Obamacare needs some significant changes and agree to delay it in exchange for extracting an expanded debt ceiling and some other concessions from Team Red. He'd be doing the country and his Team Blue senators in contested seats a solid. He'd also look responsible, moderate, and in-charge and dig his approval ratings out of the toilet. Instead he and Reid throw a tantrum and say my way or not at all.

  • Tony||

    It could use significant changes, but Republicans aren't offering any. They are playing politics and nothing else.

    I'd go for changing it into a simple Medicare for all plan, personally.

  • John||

    Neither is Obama you half wit. It is his program. You would think he would have some ideas on how to fix it. And no question the Republicans would happily take a delay without insisting on any of their changes. Go out and negotiate and fix the thing. LAH is exactly right. An actual leader with any brains rather than the village idiot we have, would do that instead of throwing a temper fit.

  • Tony||

    If he's throwing a hissy fit what might you call what Republicans are doing about Obamacare? Treating it with rational skepticism? Give me a break.

    It hasn't even fully gone into effect yet. You guys started derisively calling it Obamacare. Obama got reelected despite the law. That means it's going to get tried. If it spectacularly fails, you will have been proven right, and the people will vote accordingly in the next election. Isn't the real problem your fear that it won't be the massive apocalyptic disaster you are claiming it is?

    Nice strategy, by the way. Now if it bends the cost curve even a little it will look like a win compared to the hysterical promises your side is making.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement